Liberty Dollars held by collectors subject to seizure as contraband

[DannyM]

Liberty Dollars held by collectors subject to seizure as contraband

http://www.coinworld.com/articles/liberty-dollars-may-be-subject-to-seizure/

Liberty Dollars held by collectors may be subject to seizure as contraband by federal law enforcement, officials with the U.S. Attorney's Office and Secret Service said Aug. 24. It seems that new statements by those two federal law enforcement agencies reverse the position released from the United States Attorney's Office in Charlotte, N.C., and published by Coin World in April.

The new article quotes Jill Rose, chief of the criminal division for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Charlotte, N.C., and the prosecutor who convicted Bernard von NotHaus that the Liberty Dollar medallions are confiscable as contraband regardless if they are being exhibited for educational purposes only.

The most telling new statement in the article comes from the US Secret Service. On Aug. 24, in addition to speaking with Rose, Coin World talked separately with Glen Kessler, assistant special agent in charge in North Carolina for the U.S. Secret Service. Kessler subsequently conferred with his Secret Service superiors as to the potential confiscation and informed Coin World that because the publication has a worldwide audience, he had to defer additional comments to the U.S. Secret Service Office of Public Affairs. George Ogilvie, the public affairs officer for the U.S. Secret Service in Washington, D.C., said Aug. 25 the bureau had no comment on Liberty Dollar and indicated that Coin World would have to call back in a few weeks.

[onesalt]

The USA has a right to protect itself from fraudulent currency.

[FlipPro]

The USA has a right to protect itself from fraudulent currency.

+1

[hugolp]

I like to see how they enforce this.

[deuxmill]

The USA has a right to protect itself from fraudulent currency.

Fraudulent? or illegal?

[Hawker]

The USA has a right to protect itself from fraudulent currency.

Fraudulent? or illegal?

Fraudulent.  The could be called Liberty Doubloons, Liberty Rands or Liberty Coins or any name other than dollar. 

[deuxmill]

So they are fraudulent because they are called liberty dollars?

[joulesbeef]

YES they are fraudulent because they are called dollars.


we have many currencies in the us, mostly things like college currencies designed to give parents a way to give their kids money that they cant spend in bars or on drugs, but we have many currencies, NONE call themselves dollars, they are bucks, or something else, but not dollars.


It can confuse, dont think the only dollar is the dollar bill we have the Eisenhower dollar, the  Sacagawea dollar, you cant call your new coin a dollar.
from another link

The coins were marked with the dollar sign, the words “dollar,” “USA,” “Liberty,” “Trust in God” (instead of “In God We Trust”) and other features associated with legitimate U.S. coins.

you also cant mint coins no matter what they are called, but I find this law a bit weaker as they dont seem to enforce it against various arcades and parks which issue tokens to play with

[westkybitcoins]

Anyone who has read the details of the case know it is a complete sham. Liberty Dollars do not resemble US currency, and are not counterfeit (heck, the first time I saw a generic 1-oz. silver piece copying the obverse of the US silver Eagle, but not the reverse, I thought that was illegal. But apparently it's not, they're sold and collected everyday and no one gets "confused.")

And calling them dollars? Seriously folks? A good primer for real info: money: Understanding and Creating Alternatives to Legal Tender by Thomas H. Greco, Jr. Really gets into the history of this. Fascinating read.

Bernard von NotHaus should win on appeal, although as screwed up as the US legal system has been lately, there's certainly no guarantee. (Clearly the Fed hates the people having their own, valuable money.)

[onesalt]

he calls it dollars and makes them in such a way that they are similar to real US dollars. That makes them counterfit in the eyes of the US. This is clearly the case because thats why they ruled them illegal.

[hugolp]

he calls it dollars and makes them in such a way that they are similar to real US dollars. That makes them counterfit in the eyes of the US. This is clearly the case because thats why they ruled them illegal.

Yes, they were very very similar. Liberty dollar 5 dollar note vs Federal Reserve 5 dollar note:



You would need a modern forensic team to be able to diferentiate them. 

[JeffK]

he calls it dollars and makes them in such a way that they are similar to real US dollars. That makes them counterfit in the eyes of the US. This is clearly the case because thats why they ruled them illegal.

Yes, they were very very similar. Liberty dollar 5 dollar note vs Federal Reserve 5 dollar note:



You would need a modern forensic team to be able to diferentiate them. 

That's not the point at all. They are trying to frame it as a valid currency, and that isn't legal in the US

[the founder]

he calls it dollars and makes them in such a way that they are similar to real US dollars. That makes them counterfit in the eyes of the US. This is clearly the case because thats why they ruled them illegal.

Yes, they were very very similar. Liberty dollar 5 dollar note vs Federal Reserve 5 dollar note:



You would need a modern forensic team to be able to diferentiate them. 

I think the problem with them is the coin itself... it does resemble a walking liberty US dollar silver coin...  hence the problem.

He should have made a completely differing look and feel, and not put a demonitation on them.. or put one that is completely outside of what US currency uses.. perhaps literally call them units...

"redeemable for 1 silver unit"  

[hugolp]

That's not the point at all. They are trying to frame it as a valid currency, and that isn't legal in the US

Its totally legal in the USA to frame a private currency as a valid currency. Its not legal to frame it as legal tender, which he did not, even denying publicy that it was legal tender.

[bitrebel]

That's not the point at all. They are trying to frame it as a valid currency, and that isn't legal in the US

Its totally legal in the USA to frame a private currency as a valid currency. Its not legal to frame it as legal tender, which he did not, even denying publicy that it was legal tender.

The justice department cheated in order to gain that conviction. Bernard is a hero, not a criminal.

[westkybitcoins]

That's not the point at all. They are trying to frame it as a valid currency, and that isn't legal in the US

Its totally legal in the USA to frame a private currency as a valid currency. Its not legal to frame it as legal tender, which he did not, even denying publicy that it was legal tender.

Exactly. Again people, read up on it: there is quite a history of businesses, communities, and even individuals minting and printing their own money in the U.S. There is no law banning anyone from making their own money, it's the counterfeiting of US money that is criminal.

Anyone here can walk out their door and print out a million "Bob Dollars" or mint 1-oz. silver "Jane Dollars." Its perfectly legal, although whether the federal government comes after you depends more on how successful you are (I.e.: how threatening you are to them) than on the law.

[Bind]

The problem is not that NotHaus created a new currency.

The problem was he created a competing currency, marketed it as such, and went into great detail how to surrupticiously mix them into the nations money supply unbeknownst to the average citizen (one tactic which he specifically described ways to do this by giving them as change from vendors).

It is not WHAT he did, but HOW he did it that was illegal.

Go read the states case (online pdf) - they outline it very well, and as much as I hate to admit it, the state was right according to the letter of the law.

He just went about it the wrong way.

[Gabi]

YES they are fraudulent because they are called dollars.


we have many currencies in the us, mostly things like college currencies designed to give parents a way to give their kids money that they cant spend in bars or on drugs, but we have many currencies, NONE call themselves dollars, they are bucks, or something else, but not dollars.


It can confuse, dont think the only dollar is the dollar bill we have the Eisenhower dollar, the  Sacagawea dollar, you cant call your new coin a dollar.
from another link

The coins were marked with the dollar sign, the words “dollar,” “USA,” “Liberty,” “Trust in God” (instead of “In God We Trust”) and other features associated with legitimate U.S. coins.

you also cant mint coins no matter what they are called, but I find this law a bit weaker as they dont seem to enforce it against various arcades and parks which issue tokens to play with

Then whole honk kong is illegal!!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_dollar

[westkybitcoins]

The problem is not that NotHaus created a new currency.

The problem was he created a competing currency, marketed it as such, and went into great detail how to surrupticiously mix them into the nations money supply unbeknownst to the average citizen (one tactic which he specifically described ways to do this by giving them as change from vendors).

It is not WHAT he did, but HOW he did it that was illegal.

Go read the states case (online pdf) - they outline it very well, and as much as I hate to admit it, the state was right according to the letter of the law.

He just went about it the wrong way.

I take it you refer to his (admittedly contoversial) tactic of doing "the drop?"

I've just looked over the actual codes he was convicted of violating, and I'm not seeing how the jury did it other than through ignorance of the meaning of "current money" (although apparently "causing offense" to the US was also enough for them—heaven help us all.)

According to Black's 6th ed.:

Current Money: The currency of the country; whatever is intended to and does actually circulate as currency; every species of coin or currency. It is employed to describe money which passes from hand to hand, person to person, and circulates through the community, and is generally received. Money is current which is received as money in the common business transactions, and is the common medium in barter and trade. Page 383.

The problem with saying that offering one's own currency to someone, or that even "doing the drop" violates the code mentioning current money is that it leads to clearly unintended absurdities.

If someone dropped a $10 Canadian dollar bill into a clerk's hand to pay for a burger, stayed silent, then explained it as being Canadian money when asked, have they also violated that same code? If not, what is the difference?

And we might as well get the word out to all users of Ithaca Hours... looks like they're all criminals now. Although I suspect that the Fed will leave them alone. No silver or gold to confiscate (and then try to resell on eBay!) from those folks.

(BTW - Do you have a link to that online pdf of the state's case?)

[westkybitcoins]

They're fraudulent because they're called "Liberty Dollars" which is already a product name combination used by the FED. If anything, it's borderline trademark/copyright infringement.

So it's not that it looks just like U.S. money... it's that it shares a name with a mid-1800s coin that most people have never seen or heard of? Funny, I don't recall that being mentioned in the write-up of the trial that I read (it's seriously becoming a nuisance that so many judges ban video cameras from the courts, I'd have paid to see the footage of this trial.)

And a quick question on that point: which is worse, calling your money "Liberty Dollars", or producing and selling silver rounds which look like this



but which are actually NOT really U.S. coins, and calling them "1/2-oz. Walking Liberties," while neglecting to put the phone number and website of the minter on the reverse?

I'm wondering where you draw your line.

That and it wreaks of fraud like a late night infomercial.

I'll concede as to how Liberty Dollars could sound to some at first. Actually, Bitcoins reminds me a lot of LDs in that regard... complete with the whining about how the model is "unfair" to latecomers. But curiously, in both instances, the models that were implemented are pretty much the only realistic way to get the currency off the ground and make it work.